C’mon New York Times!  You’re letting the news get in the way of the party line propaganda!

Gerren Keith Gaynor of Fox News reports that, “New York Times headline of Trump’s remarks on mass shootings ignites backlash.”

“A New York Times headline about President Trump’s remarks on the recent mass shootings in El Paso and Dayton drew condemnation online– including some Democratic presidential candidates– and was subsequently changed late Monday.”

nyt 11

They changed their headline?

Wow!  That never happens.  That headline must have been pretty vile or grossly inaccurate.

What exactly was the headline?

“The newspaper summarized Trump’s comments, in which he denounced hate and white supremacy, with the headline “Trump Urges Unity vs. Racism” on the front page of its first edition.”

Huh?

That was the headline they were forced to change?

That headline was completely accurate and unbiased.  That was exactly what occurred.  President Trump urged for unity against racism, denouncing hate and white supremacy groups.

And therein lies the problem.

How can the democrats’ fairy tale narrative of The President being a racist be true if he is reported as being against racism and denouncing hate and white supremacy groups?

C’mon New York Times!

Get with the program!

Did you forget you’re a propaganda rag that works in concert with the democrats?!

nyt 8

It seems that in a moment of weakness you actually reported “the news” there.

Shame on you!

“A photograph of Tuesday’s first edition was tweeted out by journalist Nate Silver Monday night and was quickly slammed by critics who accused The Gray Lady of inaccurately representing Trump’s comments.”

“The Gray Lady?”

More like “Gray Lady Down!”

nyt 9

“Some Twitter users threatened to cancel their subscriptions and urged others to do the same.”

Really?!

Did you know that “some twitter users” can be found to be doing virtually anything?

Anyway…, I digress.

‘“I canceled my subscription,’ tweeted author and CNN contributor Joan Walsh, adding, ‘I can’t keep rewarding such awful news judgement.’”

Let’s get one thing clear…, Joan Walsh is a liar.  She didn’t cancel anything.  And by “awful news judgment” she means diverting from the “fake news,” liberal narrative.  She is associated with CNN after all.

nyt 4

“Prominent Democrats in Washington also took aim at the Times, including New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.”

‘“Let this front page serve as a reminder of how white supremacy is aided by – and often relies upon – the cowardice of mainstream institutions,’ the freshman congresswoman tweeted.”

What?

Please explain to me how “white supremacy is aided” by reporting that The President is calling for unity against racism and white supremacy groups?

nyt 3

These democrats are sooo confused and sooo disingenuous that it is almost beyond commenting on.

nyt 1

“Presidential candidates, many of whom blamed Trump’s rhetoric for the El Paso, Texas, shooting that left at least 22 dead, also decried the headline.”

“New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand tweeted, ‘That’s not what happened.’”

No, Kirsten…, that IS exactly what happened.

‘“Lives literally depend on you doing better, NYT. Please do,’ wrote Sen. Cory Booker.”

Thank you for your take on the matter “Spartacus!”

I believe we all can “do better…,” including you Cory.

“A photograph of the Times’ second edition of the front page hours later revealed that the headline had been changed to ‘Assailing Hate but Not Guns.’ Its website also showed a similar headline: ‘Trump Condemns Bigotry but Doesn’t Call for Major New Guns Laws.’”

nyt 6

I’m surprised these new headlines were even deemed acceptable.

There is a negative twist to them now, but there is still a bit of positivity there about The President.

“Times spokeswoman Eileen Murphy acknowledged in a statement the original headline was problematic.”

“Problematic?”

The headline was “problematic,” but it wasn’t inaccurate, huh?

‘“The original headline was flawed and was changed for all editions of the paper following the first edition,’ the statement read. ‘The headline in question never appeared online, only in the first print edition.’”

The headline was “problematic” and “flawed,” but it wasn’t inaccurate?

Gee…, that reaction to the original headline would seem to be a metaphor for the democrats and their co-conspirators, the mainstream media!

“Problematic” and “flawed.”

nyt 7

nyt 2

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

 

The Washington Post…, “Democracy dies on its pages.” 

I’m responding to a recent article in The Washington Post titled, “Sarah Sanders Watch: ‘Mouthpiece for fascism’?”

The article is by Erik Wemple, a media critic for The Washington Post, whose tag line is “Democracy dies in darkness.”

It must be getting pretty “dark” over there at the old Washington Post.

sanders 4

In the article, Mr. Wemple whines about the White House Press Secretary, Sarah Sanders, not having had a traditional White House briefing in quite a while.

Do you really wonder why that is Mr. Wemple, or are you just pretending not to know?

Well…, in case it is the former, I’ll clue you in.

First of all, it’s not written anywhere that these press briefings have to occur at all.

Second, most of the media that attended these briefings were not interested in getting briefed.  They were only interested in attacking President Trump, his administration, and Sarah Sanders.

Is it any wonder this is one tradition The President isn’t too concerned about honoring?

Mr. Wemple then continues to whine that Sarah Sanders seems to prefer to discuss her talking points with more “sympathetic” Fox News interviewers.

sanders 3

I don’t think “Sympathetic” is quite the right word here.  I think I would go with the term “fair and balanced.”

It wasn’t too long ago that I can remember Obama’s press secretaries avoiding the reporters from Fox News as opposed to any of the remaining horde of truly “sympathetic,” liberal propaganda reporters.

I can also recall the Obama administration actually spying on reporters who didn’t play by his “swampy” rules…, but I digress.

Mr. Wemple then proceeds to dredge up the tired “obstruction of justice” topic…, again…, claiming, “The Mueller report documented close to a dozen instances of possible obstruction of justice by President Trump,” while claiming Mueller “did not charge any crimes in deference to Justice Department policy toward sitting presidents.”

If I’ve said this once I’ve said this a hundred times…, IF ROBERT MUELLER COULD HAVE CHARGED PRESIDENT TRUMP WITH A-N-Y-T-H-I-N-G…, BELIEVE ME, HE WOULD HAVE.

IF ROBERT MUELLER COULD HAVE RECOMMENDED CHARGING PRESIDENT TRUMP WITH A-N-Y-T-H-I-N-G…, BELIEVE ME, HE WOULD HAVE.

Mr. Wemple then continues to cry about Sarah Sanders “hitting back” at charges made by various democrats, and actually defending The President and his administration.

You do understand that is precisely what her job is don’t you Mr. Wemple?

sanders 2

He then refers to a tweet by Alec Baldwin (that wise old sage and ever on duty guardian of democracy…, cough, cough), where he referred to Sarah Sanders as a “mouthpiece-for-fascism…,” a claim Mr. Wemple obviously supports.

Fascism?

Fascism, Mr. Wemple?

Ok…, let’s talk about fascism and fascists a little bit.

Have you heard of The Poynter Institute, Mr. Wemple?  I’m sure you have, but most other people haven’t.  It’s kind of a well-kept and camouflaged secret.  In a nutshell, The Poynter Institute is a boot camp for liberal, socialist, fascist, “journalists.”  It’s the kind of “journalism” school that Joseph Goebbels, the Nazi Minister of Propaganda, could really appreciate, and a school that is well represented by many members of the “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media” who make Washington D.C. their home.

Oh…, and by the way…, was it Sarah Sanders who was pushing the false narrative of Russian collusion for the last 2 years, or was it the “liberal propaganda,” “mainstream” media?

Who again are the fascists attempting to control the media?

In addition…, who in “the media” are the ones accounting for over 90% negative articles concerning President Trump?  If you take out the positive stories (or at least the non-negative ones) by Fox News, that means the rest of “the media” is basically 100% negative 100% of the time.  And saying that doesn’t even cause me to flinch.

Who again are the fascists attempting to control the narrative through negative propaganda and by omission?

Your cover has been blown Eric Wemple.  Just like the cover has been blown for all of the “biased, liberal propaganda, fake news media” since President Trump ran for president.

The “mainstream” media being anywhere close to fair and balanced is the problem here, not Sarah Sanders.

sanders 1

WINNING!

 

NOTE:  If you’re not already “following” me and you liked my blog(s) today, please “click” on the comment icon just to the right of the date at the bottom of this article.  From there you can let me know you “like” my blog, leave a comment or click the “Follow” button which will keep you up to date on all of my latest posts.

Thank you, MrEricksonRules.

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑